Choosing City Production

[jsciv69]

In this Civilization series, Cities are given a choice of what to produce. This a choice of a Building, Wonder, or Unit. And we are given the choice of just one of these. If there is a next Civilization installment, we need to change this. We need to allow a City to produce more than one item at a time. Even in Ancient times Cities produced more than one item at a time. This is called multi-tasking. So let have a choice of One City Building, One District Building, One Wonder(if available), One Unit. This way our Cities expand and are defended at the same time. And when reaching Era, those choices increase. This will grow our Cities better. And our Civilization is better developed and ready for each coming Era.

 

[Zaarin]

Being able to produce four things at a time might be overkill, especially since there should be an opportunity cost for wonders, but I definitely agree that Unit production should be separated off from Infrastructure production.

 

[Zegangani]

I agree with @Zaarin, there should be an opportunity cost for all Infrastructures (including Districts) and Projects, but Units should be built (or actually trained) separately. And to balance this shift, the Units must either get increased Production Cost (Which I don't think anyone will like, and it doesn't justify the split if done this way) or we gotta cut out the Gold Purchase of Units (still purchasable with Faith though). Ofc it would still need to be balanced, but being able to train Units on the assembly Line and also having the Ability to Buy them with Gold (excluding Mercenaries) would be too OP.

My Ideal City Production System would be to make a City be able to built up to 2 Things at a Time at the beginning, with the Number increasing after every 2 Eras (Max 5). And we would have Parameters four each of the Items that we can use to increase/decrease the production priority of them. Ex: a City has 3 Items that it produces, the production rate is equally distributed between them, each getting 1/3 of the Production of the City, but if we want, we can increase One Item to consume 1/2 of the production (instead of 1/3), so that the other Two get 1/4 each. But, unfortunately, this wouldn't work in a Civ Game, it would only work in a Game where you have lots of things that you can produce (I think that other new 4X Title has a lot of Buildings to offer) and I can only see this justified for longer Games, like Marathon in Civ VI.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

My Ideal City Production System would be to make a City be able to built up to 2 Things at a Time at the beginning, with the Number increasing after every 2 Eras (Max 5). And we would have Parameters four each of the Items that we can use to increase/decrease the production priority of them. Ex: a City has 3 Items that it produces, the production rate is equally distributed between them, each getting 1/3 of the Production of the City, but if we want, we can increase One Item to consume 1/2 of the production (instead of 1/3), so that the other Two get 1/4 each. But, unfortunately, this wouldn't work in a Civ Game, it would only work in a Game where you have lots of things that you can produce (I think that other new 4X Title has a lot of Buildings to offer) and I can only see this justified for longer Games, like Marathon in Civ VI.

I like the ideas behind it. I think producing one thing at the beginning of the game is still the way to go but then other factors get involved depending on what the city has.

For example you are able to produce military units separately from the city if you build an encampment. Naval units can also be built separately from any coastal city with a harbor. Maybe unit production is only gathered from their respective strategic resources to build as a balance?

I think buildings like workshops or factories would also be the main drive behind increasing or decreasing the production priority of items.

 

[Zegangani]

I like the ideas behind it. I think producing one thing at the beginning of the game is still the way to go but then other factors get involved depending on what the city has.

For example you are able to produce military units separately from the city if you build an encampment. Naval units can also be built separately from any coastal city with a harbor. Maybe unit production is only gathered from their respective strategic resources to build as a balance?

I think buildings like workshops or factories would also be the main drive behind increasing or decreasing the production priority of items.

Yes, producing one Item at the beginning of the Game is reasonable. There won't be many build choices anyway.

What if Encampments and Harbors each have their own Unit Production Panel (seperating them from City Centers, which will still be able to build Units if they don't have these Districts), listing the Units they can build, and later Aerodromes for Air Units as well? And like you say, the main production cost for them should be strategic resources (like Timber for early Sea Units) and I was also thinking of just make a Turn Cost for the Training Time, that will change based on Game Speed (like with the usual production cost). Ex: in a Standard Speed Game, building a Horseman would cost 20 Horses and take 5 Turns (can be reduced with Abilities and Effects), and also consume 1 Citizen (to prevent the abuse of this if you have enough Resources - but to also prevent Players from using this to reduce overpopulation in Cities, deleting a Unit returns the Citizen to its original City).

 

[mitsho]

If you have three channels for a city to produce stuff, is the production split threeways or does every channel get 100% of it? If it's split, can you move the slider? If you do, then it makes the most sense to put the slider at 100% for one channel and zero for the others as it's best to produce as fast as possible. So what you managed to do is just complicate things.

And that thing that perturbs you is actually on purpose. The Developers want you to choose between a Unit and a Building. I hate it, since I most often tend to go for the building - I'm a completionist - and forget the defence there. Civ6 is designed in a way that a city doesn't need every building, but I rather had all of them. So thus I do agree that it could be a good idea to split Units from everything else. I tend to go for the simple proposals, so why not make "everything else" built by production (for wonders, other cities can feed into) while Units can just be bought? Comparatively, armies are set up quicker after all and most often you need them quicker. Make them cost a citizen or two instead and you have the same effect, but in a simplified way: A channel for units, and one for everything else.

I am aware that this is just the opposite proposition from the posts above me. Reducing production cost for units to zero, but just have a "train time" + "strategic resource" cost, can also work. It's quite similar in effect after all, with the exception of it probably being reasonable to constantly produce units which would be micro-heavy. But might be more flavourful than just "buying" them.

 

[Zegangani]

Yes, the Production of the City would split threeways, and a Slider is what I meant by a Parameter, which you can use to increase/decrease the ratio of Production that gets split into the Production Channels, like from 1/3-1/3-1/3 to 1/6-3/6-2/6, or you can just focus on producing 1 Item at a Time (1/1-0/1-0/1) (It should be the Player's choice after all).
The Reason why I like this Concept is because it would add more complexity to City Management, and it would also be more realistic, so that you can build the Terracotta Armee in a City while there are also Units that get Trained and a Market that gets repaired.

And you're right, this can't work in a Civ Game, where it's all about opportunity Cost (including Mutually Exclusive Buildings/Districts), which actually doesn't bother me. It's the production Cost of Units that make them take too much Time to get built in an average production City that I too don't like. That's why splitting only the Units from the City Production would be a good thing.

Making Units purchasable with Gold instead of building them would fix that Issue. But I think it would require a more balanced Gold generation/management, otherwise Civs that struggle with Gold will get easily overolled and Civs that have Gold in abundance will take advantage of that. Unless there are Unique Militia Units that don't cost Gold (just Citizen) but get unlocked with certain Governments and are for Defense only (can't fight outside your Territory or Home Continent), unless you spend the Gold Ofc.

I think constantly having a City to build something is just a Design choice of the Devs, it doesn't have to be a Rule. Perhaps a City that isn't producing anything could increase all its Yields Output, because its Citizen wouldn't focus on a Specific thing but can help with other things.

 

[Hellenism Salesman]

Splitting the production of units and the production of infrastructure is actually something I've done in a 4X concept of my own. It's reassuring to see that most here find it a good idea.

On the idea of producing multiple items at once, I think some configuration of this concept is the optimal way to do a Production system. The funny thing with our current Production system is that its a completely passable mechanic as it stands, but reading the ideas here makes me realize that it has room for improvement. Unlike with some other inadequate systems, implementing these changes to Production would simply make a good system better instead of fixing a bad system, so I can't say its the most necessary change for Civ VII, but the appeal of it is too great for me not to wish for it.

To throw in my own ideas, I think its best to have as few contradicting "production" abstractions as possible. What I mean by this is that our current Production system compiles training military units (which does require some of the general raw materials production is meant to represent), building infrastructure, building wonders, building civilian units, and completing yield-generating projects into one panel. While I think building infrastructure and building wonders makes total sense for Civ's current idea of Production, training military units should really be something separate. I'm going to try and be very conservative with my wording here, lest a certain military historian come and correct me , but from my basic understanding training soldiers is not just about the raw materials needed (which is what Production represents) but the quality of your training. Thus, I think training units should be somewhat separated from city Production. Typically, military training isn't even a job for a city and its bureaucratic hands, but is instead handled separately. Effectively, the workers who are making your libraries and Pyramids don't know the first thing about training men for war.

One of the major contradictory "production" abstractions to me is Builders. Now, don't get me wrong, I like using Builders. I like making Builders. I think the visual and audio effects for Builders give their actions this satisfying weight to them. But, I don't think they make much sense. If the divide between tile improvements and buildings remains identical to how it is in Civ VI, then I suggest cities gain an extra "Production channel" (like the ones discussed above) dedicated to tile improvements. But, in agreement with what @Zaarin said, I don't think we should ever give cities too many Production channels, so my suggestion is to limit it to two. There should be a central Production channel for constructing centralized things like buildings in districts and wonders, and an outer Production channel for handling the construction of tile improvements which are farther away from the city center.

As for specifics on handling the newfound split between military production and infrastructure production, I have no answers. In my 4X concept mentioned at the beginning of my post, I have the act of training units completely separate from regular "Production" (it goes under a different name in my concept), with the only crossroads between the two worlds forming when "Production" makes weapons and armor for your units. Whether the split should be that pronounced, more subtle, or if it should happen at all is a larger question for someone more qualified (and with more free time) than me to answer, but its definitely something worth considering.

Congratulations, you read it all
(I know I didn't make your job easy )

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

Yes, the Production of the City would split threeways, and a Slider is what I meant by a Parameter, which you can use to increase/decrease the ratio of Production that gets split into the Production Channels, like from 1/3-1/3-1/3 to 1/6-3/6-2/6, or you can just focus on producing 1 Item at a Time (1/1-0/1-0/1) (It should be the Player's choice after all).
The Reason why I like this Concept is because it would add more complexity to City Management, and it would also be more realistic, so that you can build the Terracotta Armee in a City while there are also Units that get Trained and a Market that gets repaired.

That doesn't add complexity. One thing is the most valuable to do right now and you only get it if you finish making it, so it is correct to spend all the production on one thing if the alternative is just getting that thing slower and the other thing no faster than otherwise.

For this to be valid as a strategy game, the multiple production channels must not be allowed to work on the same thing. As a corollary of that requirement, there must be little freedom to slide productivity from one channel into the others.
So, that is, the multiple channels have their own output rating and operate separate from each other. Personally I don't see what it adds, given that now you're just making a choice of what is the second most important thing to make after deciding on the first one, if you're allowed to pick up the second project with the prime productivity when the prime project is finished. If you're not allowed to do that, then you'll also be hounded by wondering if it's better to spend the subprime production on a -third- most important thing instead of second so that the prime productivity can shift to the second thing and finish it faster, in case the two decisions are out of sync.

Another option is if the option to split production increases the total amount of hammers outgoing from the city, but still decreases the highest quality productivity being made. But I just boggle at why I would want to deal with this.

 

[Zegangani]

That doesn't add complexity. One thing is the most valuable to do right now and you only get it if you finish making it, so it is correct to spend all the production on one thing if the alternative is just getting that thing slower and the other thing no faster than otherwise.

For this to be valid as a strategy game, the multiple production channels must not be allowed to work on the same thing. As a corollary of that requirement, there must be little freedom to slide productivity from one channel into the others.
So, that is, the multiple channels have their own output rating and operate separate from each other. Personally I don't see what it adds, given that now you're just making a choice of what is the second most important thing to make after deciding on the first one. If you're allowed to pick up the second project with the prime productivity when the prime project is finished. If you're not allowed to do that, then you'll also be hounded by wondering if it's better to spend the subprime production on a -third- most important thing instead of second so that the prime productivity can shift to the second thing and finish it faster, in case the two decisions are out of sync.

Another option is if the option to split production increases the total amount of hammers outgoing from the city, but still decreases the highest quality productivity being made. But I just boggle at why I would want to deal with this.

It shouldn't be available to the Player to work on the same thing in all the Production Channels, and the production slider and the ability to just choose one build channel instead of multiple is the fix to that (it's a choice, so if you want to, you can just use just one Channel like always, and queue items for that one channel).
But the Multiple Channels don't actually have their own Output, but draw the Production from the City's total Production Yield. It's the Modifiers and Effects that affect the Output of each Channel based on each one's Production Item.

True, there won't be any (or much) difference in efficiency between a Single Channel and a Multi Channel Prod System, but the main Idea behind this System is that it would allow for more varierty in the Production Process. It's mostly a Flavor thing for People who love to micromanage Cities, like myself, and min-max not just the Yields, but I can also see this Mechanism helping with many other Things in the Game, but for that, we have to take out the Civ Glasses:

1) Projects: A City can build something while it's working on a Project that generates more of a Yield/Resource per Turn while consuming something else (Like Gold from a Commerce Project - so that you can get that Gold to finance the Unit that gets built).
2) Cross-City Projects: Cities could help each other to build a Wonder for example, without having to put all production resources into that Project.

And the Combo between 1 and 2 would allow for:
3) If we would have a more Complex Resource System, we could have Cities that can specialize on something, for example, Units that require multiple Resources that need to get produced first in some Buildings:
- We could activate a City Project of a Building that produces a certain amount of Swords by consuming Iron. The City can build anything while this Project is running. Reason: The City will only produce Swords and consume Iron while you're telling it to, so you can only produce the Amount of Swords you want it to, so you don't lose Iron that you wanted to also use to build Armors for a Knight Unit or lose it because of a limited resource Cap that you can have at a Time (Things getting rusty?).
- If we include Modifiers and Effects (from Buildings, Policies...etc) that apply to certain Cities or certain Production items, this would make Cross-City Projects more important. Example:
- a City that has modifiers that decrease the production cost of an Ironclad Unit and give Abilities/XP/Promotion to that Unit, can focus on training the Units for the Ironclad, while another City is building the Ships from Iron, that are required for the Ironclad Unit to be finished.
- This way, we can make Cities specialize on something(s). a City can specialize on the Training of Sea Military Units, another on building Ships (from any Era). (The Mutually exclusive Buildings would play out here). This would fix the Issue where a Coastal City can freely train Cavalery Units, which doesn't make sense. at least they should be weaker than the ones from a City with a Horses resource.

All of that would add to a more alive Economy System and improve the Empire Management Aspect of the Game. So that each City can specialize on something and the Cost of that would be a more strategic War System: If you want to cripple a Military Power House, then cut the Resource Stream that maintains that by conquering the Cities that produce those Resources and use them to your Advantage (Especially if the Resources get stored in Cities and aren't available to the Player at any Time, something that bothers me in Civ, where conquering a City doesn't even give Gold).

 

[Naokaukodem]

Yes, the Production of the City would split threeways, and a Slider is what I meant by a Parameter, which you can use to increase/decrease the ratio of Production that gets split into the Production Channels, like from 1/3-1/3-1/3 to 1/6-3/6-2/6, or you can just focus on producing 1 Item at a Time (1/1-0/1-0/1) (It should be the Player's choice after all).
The Reason why I like this Concept is because it would add more complexity to City Management, and it would also be more realistic, so that you can build the Terracotta Armee in a City while there are also Units that get Trained and a Market that gets repaired.

Mitsho already pointed out that it is was vain design, and HorseshoeHermit just above me : if you can merge production queues, you will want to always merge them, making Civ series. Because if you can produce a unit in 6 turns and a building in 8 turns, it's always better to have one sooner, like 6 or 8 turns, instead of both in 14 turns. Therefore, you shouldn't be able to merge them, creating a frustration for the players that will then ask to be able to merge them, *shiny idea*.

As to detaching military production from normal one, I can agree because war should be a major concern in every game like it was in reality, and players should be able to do wars "freely", using free units or population points that spawn instantly. One of the solution could be to give population points each a promotion based on the calendar. From turn 1 to 2, you could have 5 promotions for your first pop point, creating a strong worker or warrior. For your next pop point, created with generation of food, you would have promotions based on its year of apparition and years passing in a turn. That could be maybe 2 promotions in its second turn, or one after 20 turns if you are in modern era. Promotions could act as abilities (aka better yields) or military unit creation and training. You could have a super competent peasant, or a +15 strenght soldier against other humans. You could specialize each pop point, with each militaristic promotion giving +X strenght against other humans + range/melee/siege/naval/air ability (maybe neglecting the cost of the hardware as with embarking units). Obviously with such a system based of the size and age of your population, you may want everytime to opt for more food first. You could go for brute force early but with risks of not starting close enough to another player. Except if you choose a barbarian way of playing, so brute force would always be a good choice, even turn 2.

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

When would you guys build more then one item at a time if the production is split between the two? This could be fun but most things you build you only benefit when they are complete. I guess there are tricks around almost completing unit but I don't think this is what is being discussed.

I can see a case for "reversing" this idea. Meaning you would start out by only maximum amount of productions into item your building, and any extra must go into a second item. I this case you would to gain the ability at some point to put all your production into one item to finish it quickly.

Slightly related, but I can see a "pseudo item" build queue in Civ7. Replacing luxuries automatically providing amenities, you have to choose what city builds and exports.

 

[Zegangani]

Mitsho already pointed out that it is was vain design, and HorseshoeHermit just above me : if you can merge production queues, you will want to always merge them, making Civ series. Because if you can produce a unit in 6 turns and a building in 8 turns, it's always better to have one sooner, like 6 or 8 turns, instead of both in 14 turns. Therefore, you shouldn't be able to merge them, creating a frustration for the players that will then ask to be able to merge them, *shiny idea*.

I know this can't work in a Civ Game, and I wasn't suggesting it for Civ. It's just something that I would like to see, ideally in a Game similar to Civ, but with completely different Gameplay that would allow for such a System, like in a mostly Empire/City building Game where it's about Economy/Empire Management and where Wars/Battles are fought by assigning Units Tasks, Missions and Operations (automated, similar to Spys in Civ) and are not directly controled by the Player (maybe except Great Generals and Scouts). So a Game where you don't always need something immediately (situational), but where you can plan long term.

As to detaching military production from normal one, I can agree because war should be a major concern in every game like it was in reality, and players should be able to do wars "freely", using free units or population points that spawn instantly. One of the solution could be to give population points each a promotion based on the calendar. From turn 1 to 2, you could have 5 promotions for your first pop point, creating a strong worker or warrior. For your next pop point, created with generation of food, you would have promotions based on its year of apparition and years passing in a turn. That could be maybe 2 promotions in its second turn, or one after 20 turns if you are in modern era. Promotions could act as abilities (aka better yields) or military unit creation and training. You could have a super competent peasant, or a +15 strenght soldier against other humans. You could specialize each pop point, with each militaristic promotion giving +X strenght against other humans + range/melee/siege/naval/air ability (maybe neglecting the cost of the hardware as with embarking units). Obviously with such a system based of the size and age of your population, you may want everytime to opt for more food first. You could go for brute force early but with risks of not starting close enough to another player. Except if you choose a barbarian way of playing, so brute force would always be a good choice, even turn 2.

I'm all in for giving Pops/Citizens unique Attributes and Personalities so they can play a bigger Role in the Game. Though, instead of giving a Pop a Promotion that is hardcoded, how about making the Citizens earn their Skills based on how many Turns they are working a Tile/in a Building (Farms, Lumber Mills, Mines and IZ Buildings increase Strength(among other things), and Science Buildings increase Knowledge/Science Yield...etc)? and only assign the Personality Traits (Religion, Talent (what they can easily learn and master), Ethnicity...etc) at their Birth?

I can see a case for "reversing" this idea. Meaning you would start out by only maximum amount of productions into item your building, and any extra must go into a second item. I this case you would to gain the ability at some point to put all your production into one item to finish it quickly.

Part of the Design of the City Production in Civ VI is, when you have more production output than the (1st) item requires, the overflow gets applied for the next (2nd) production item. But this has 2 Issues:
- if the overflow production is higher than the next (2nd) production item requires, then the overflow of that doesn't get saved for the next (3rd) item, but gets lost. Though, you mostly encounter this Issue when you're building a Wonder that is close to get finished but suddenly another Player builds that Wonder first, so you have plenty of Production overflow that can be used for multiple things (in Theory) but are only used for the next (2nd) build item. Or when building Districts in late Game.
- if the production output of a City is higher than the next (1st) build item, then that item doesn't get build immediately in that Turn, so that you can use the overflow production of that to build another (2nd) item in that same Turn, instead, you have to wait until next Turn, then you can select that 2nd Item. The production overflow saved partially solves the Issue of losing the production, but in return you lose Turns. Turns in which you could build a Unit or Building earlier, which is especially annoying with Units that most of the Time you need immediately. I can see this as a Design Choice from the Devs, but this just makes me more eager to have Unit production seperated from normal City production.

 

[Zaarin]

I'm all in for giving Pops/Citizens unique Attributes and Personalities so they can play a bigger Role in the Game. Though, instead of giving a Pop a Promotion that is hardcoded, how about making the Citizens earn their Skills based on how many Turns they are working a Tile/in a Building (Farms, Lumber Mills, Mines and IZ Buildings increase Strength(among other things), and Science Buildings increase Knowledge/Science Yield...etc)? and only assign the Personality Traits (Religion, Talent (what they can easily learn and master), Ethnicity...etc) at their Birth?

I'm 100% behind giving populations Religious and Ethnic identities, but I don't think personalizing them beyond that is a good idea. Early game turns span lifetimes, and even by the midgame they're spanning generations. Plus population units are meant to represent abstractions of hundreds, thousands, or even millions of people depending on the game era. So giving them Religious/Ethnic identities makes sense--that one Buddhist Korean population unit in your Zoroastrian Aztec city represents a minority population you acquired from immigration or conquest--but giving the population unit a name, talents, a lifespan that couldn't possibly be more than a single turn for the better part of the game...all of that undermines the abstraction and makes it feel like your 35 population city has a literal population of 35 people.

That said, I would really like to tie some small special abilities to population units in Civ7, comparable to population units in ES2. I think it goes without saying that tying this to ethnicity would be a potential firestorm no one wants ("Why does my Jewish population produce +1 Gold per tile? Just what exactly are you insinuating?!"), but religion could certainly have per-population benefits.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I'm 100% behind giving populations Religious and Ethnic identities, but I don't think personalizing them beyond that is a good idea. Early game turns span lifetimes, and even by the midgame they're spanning generations. Plus population units are meant to represent abstractions of hundreds, thousands, or even millions of people depending on the game era. So giving them Religious/Ethnic identities makes sense--that one Buddhist Korean population unit in your Zoroastrian Aztec city represents a minority population you acquired from immigration or conquest--but giving the population unit a name, talents, a lifespan that couldn't possibly be more than a single turn for the better part of the game...all of that undermines the abstraction and makes it feel like your 35 population city has a literal population of 35 people.

Wait you mean only leaders can be immortal?
Anyways I'm in agreement that giving each citizen a religion and ethnicity is enough.

That said, I would really like to tie some small special abilities to population units in Civ7, comparable to population units in ES2. I think it goes without saying that tying this to ethnicity would be a potential firestorm no one wants ("Why does my Jewish population produce +1 Gold per tile? Just what exactly are you insinuating?!"), but religion could certainly have per-population benefits.

Is being Jewish supposed to be a religion or ethnicity in that statement?
Either way attributes still tied to religious populations should probably treated like they are now, which are religious beliefs.

I know it's not realistic but I think ethnicity should just be tied to a certain civilization to make things simpler, as in ethno-national groups. That is in game American, Indian, and Canadian ethnicities would be the same as being either Aztec, Korean, or Japanese.

 

[Zaarin]

Wait you mean only leaders can be immortal?

Can't share elixir with the plebes.

Is being Jewish supposed to be a religion or ethnicity in that statement?

Yes.

Either way attributes still tied to religious populations should probably treated like they are now, which are religious beliefs.

Yes, that's what I meant. There should be a founding belief tied to all religions (and to pantheons) that gives followers of that belief system a certain bonus.

I know it's not realistic but I think ethnicity should just be tied to a certain civilization to make things simpler, as in ethno-national groups. That is in game American, Indian, and Canadian ethnicities would be the same as being either Aztec, Korean, or Japanese.

Yes and no. I think every major civilization should have its own ethnicity (city-states, or better minor civs, too), but I also think it would be interesting to have stateless minorities like Jews, Kurds, and Romani, bonus points for making them ethnoreligious minorities (which would tie into the more organic religious system I want in Civ7).

 

[Naokaukodem]

I'm all in for giving Pops/Citizens unique Attributes and Personalities so they can play a bigger Role in the Game. Though, instead of giving a Pop a Promotion that is hardcoded, how about making the Citizens earn their Skills based on how many Turns they are working a Tile/in a Building (Farms, Lumber Mills, Mines and IZ Buildings increase Strength(among other things), and Science Buildings increase Knowledge/Science Yield...etc)? and only assign the Personality Traits (Religion, Talent (what they can easily learn and master), Ethnicity...etc) at their Birth?

It would be sure less micromanaging, the key issue of my idea. In the other hand, it would be more passive and maybe give less things to do to the player. But I guess even giving them a trait at birth would be micromanagingly overwhelming in mid game with a large empire. And the problem with your idea is that you cannot upgrade Pop points before you play with them, not even before you move them. I guess save Promotion could be a thing with my idea, although you obviously don't always want to do that. (the sooner the better, in the case of turtling)

Part of the Design of the City Production in Civ VI is, when you have more production output than the (1st) item requires, the overflow gets applied for the next (2nd) production item. But this has 2 Issues:
- if the overflow production is higher than the next (2nd) production item requires, then the overflow of that doesn't get saved for the next (3rd) item, but gets lost. Though, you mostly encounter this Issue when you're building a Wonder that is close to get finished but suddenly another Player builds that Wonder first, so you have plenty of Production overflow that can be used for multiple things (in Theory) but are only used for the next (2nd) build item. Or when building Districts in late Game.
- if the production output of a City is higher than the next (1st) build item, then that item doesn't get build immediately in that Turn, so that you can use the overflow production of that to build another (2nd) item in that same Turn, instead, you have to wait until next Turn, then you can select that 2nd Item. The production overflow saved partially solves the Issue of losing the production, but in return you lose Turns. Turns in which you could build a Unit or Building earlier, which is especially annoying with Units that most of the Time you need immediately. I can see this as a Design Choice from the Devs, but this just makes me more eager to have Unit production seperated from normal City production.

Ah I didn't know that, although I suspected it somehow. It's clearly a lack and not a feature. Is this the same for techs ?

 

[Zegangani]

Early game turns span lifetimes, and even by the midgame they're spanning generations

That's the same thing for Promotions of Military and Religious Units, and that's why I'm suggesting it for Citizens too while we are at it. I don't imagine this (Promotions or just efficiency improvement) as representing real People that learn/train in a Historical Timeline, but as respresntative of that ahistorically in the same Timeline. So that we can still have a feeling of training and improving our Units/Citizens without bothering over historicity or realistic Timeline for that.

In the Case of Mili Units Promotions, we can justify this with Veterans teaching new recruits the Experience they gathered so far, but I don't see why this shouldn't be the case for Civilian Citizens too.

There are many ahistorical and unrealistic things in Civ that bother me, Unit Promotions was one of them at first but I got used to it and I quite like it now since I don't look at Civ as a historical Game anymore. Apart from the Leaders, we can also throw Governors (who are also Immortal), Random Disasters (Forest Fires that take many Years!? why doesn't the Climate System correctly count the CO2 output from that?) and Spys (that take 10s of Years for a simple Operation) in that Pot. (Though, so far, I only like Volcano Eruptions and Floods as Disasters, since they take only 1 Turn)

Plus population units are meant to represent abstractions of hundreds, thousands, or even millions of people depending on the game era. So giving them Religious/Ethnic identities makes sense--that one Buddhist Korean population unit in your Zoroastrian Aztec city represents a minority population you acquired from immigration or conquest--but giving the population unit a name, talents, a lifespan that couldn't possibly be more than a single turn for the better part of the game...all of that undermines the abstraction and makes it feel like your 35 population city has a literal population of 35 people.

That said, I would really like to tie some small special abilities to population units in Civ7, comparable to population units in ES2. I think it goes without saying that tying this to ethnicity would be a potential firestorm no one wants ("Why does my Jewish population produce +1 Gold per tile? Just what exactly are you insinuating?!"), but religion could certainly have per-population benefits.

And to a degree it's the same thing for Military Units, most of them represent 100s or 1000s of Soldiers and 10 000s in the case of Armees and Corps. But the reason I'm suggesting Citizens to improve their Skillset isn't for having a Promotions Tree for Civilians but to improve Tall Play. Citizens (Scholars) in a Campus that produce Science since many many Turns shouldn't be like Citizens that constantly get replaced from a Campus to a Farm and then to a Harbor. There should be a cost Opportunity when replacing a Citizen.

but religion could certainly have per-population benefits.

Yep, it would be nice to benefit from multi-ethnic/religion Cities without having the Culture/Religion Victory(assuming we get one), respectively, on. I like the Benefits of Civ VI Beliefs, but all that have to do with Citizens are tied to your founded Religion.

It would be sure less micromanaging, the key issue of my idea. In the other hand, it would be more passive and maybe give less things to do to the player. But I guess even giving them a trait at birth would be micromanagingly overwhelming in mid game with a large empire. And the problem with your idea is that you cannot upgrade Pop points before you play with them, not even before you move them. I guess save Promotion could be a thing with my idea, although you obviously don't always want to do that. (the sooner the better, in the case of turtling)

You'll always find Issues and things not thought out in a Concept, just like Zaarin and you did in my Citizen Skill Improvement Idea (where the Skill is actually efficiency in a specific Yield(s) or Strength in Combat). And that's why I love this type of Conversations, even if one has a solid Idea/Concept (or think he has) there are always things that one has missed to think about, or didn't look at it from all the Angles or taking other things under consideration.

Ah I didn't know that, although I suspected it somehow. It's clearly a lack and not a feature. Is this the same for techs ?

AFAIK, the Tech research saves the overflow Science for the next Tech just like the City Production, but I haven't tested it like this latter to be sure how it works.

 

[Zaarin]

That's the same thing for Promotions of Military and Religious Units, and that's why I'm suggesting it for Citizens too while we are at it. I don't imagine this (Promotions or just efficiency improvement) as representing real People that learn/train in a Historical Timeline, but as respresntative of that ahistorically in the same Timeline. So that we can still have a feeling of training and improving our Units/Citizens without bothering over historicity or realistic Timeline for that.

In the Case of Mili Units Promotions, we can justify this with Veterans teaching new recruits the Experience they gathered so far, but I don't see why this shouldn't be the case for Civilian Citizens too.

Fair. I guess I don't think about military units much because I don't use them much after the early game...

There are many ahistorical and unrealistic things in Civ that bother me, Unit Promotions was one of them at first but I got used to it and I quite like it now since I don't look at Civ as a historical Game anymore. Apart from the Leaders, we can also throw Governors (who are also Immortal), Random Disasters (Forest Fires that take many Years!? why doesn't the Climate System correctly count the CO2 output from that?) and Spys (that take 10s of Years for a simple Operation) in that Pot. (Though, so far, I only like Volcano Eruptions and Floods as Disasters, since they take only 1 Turn)

I do think that when natural disasters return (and I hope they do) they are all limited to one turn events--and in fact I kind of think they should be limited to volcanoes and floods. Other disasters feel off on Civ's time scale, with tornadoes being the worst offenders.

Yep, it would be nice to benefit from multi-ethnic/religion Cities without having the Culture/Religion Victory(assuming we get one), respectively, on. I like the Benefits of Civ VI Beliefs, but their all tied to your founded Religion.

Aside from ethnicity, more organic religion that's not tied to a specific civilization is very near the top of my Civ7 wishlist.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Yes and no. I think every major civilization should have its own ethnicity (city-states, or better minor civs, too), but I also think it would be interesting to have stateless minorities like Jews, Kurds, and Romani, bonus points for making them ethnoreligious minorities (which would tie into the more organic religious system I want in Civ7).

Agree about city-states too. How would you implement stateless minorities?
Would they just be enhanced barbarians and tribal villages? Because my idea for Civ 7 is that tribal villages can eventually form city-states just like barbarians through their own clans.